Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: zbigreddogz
So, Joe Blow the 18 year old, should be able to walk into a gun store, and buy a rocket launcher capable of taking out an armored car.

If you think that changes in weapons technology beyond anything the forefathers imagined make it necessary to restrict private ownership of overly-powerful arms, why not pass a constitutional amendment?

Notwithstanding the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, Congress shall have the power to restrict as it sees fit the possession or ownership of firearms which are designed to fire projectiles in excess of two inches in diameter, or of explosive shells whose energy output on detonation would exceed ____ joules. For purposes of this amendment, the term "inch" shall represent the common usage at the time this amendment is adopted, to wit, the distance travelled by light in 1/11,802,852,700 second.
I don't think the NRA would work against such an amendment, but Sarah Brady et al. would fight it vigorously. Any idea why?
132 posted on 11/26/2005 8:36:11 PM PST by supercat (Sony delinda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies ]


To: supercat

Because it's not neccessary, they clearly didn't mean anything, anytime, anywhere, and nobody but a insane fanatic would ever think they did.

If you are going to say anybody can have any arms anywhere under the 2nd ammendment, how about a nuke? I like nukes, they are fun. I want one to keep in the trunk of my car just in case the Chinese ever invade, so then I can take out a whole battalion of them. And if I accidentally set it off when I get drunk in downtown New York? Oops. Sorry. There goes 20 million people.

That's clearly idiotic.

This is nuts. I'm not for registering guns. I'd favor overturning all the loopholes you have to go through to get a handgun. I'm against the so-called 'assult weapons ban' and I cheered when the congress let it die. I think the so-called 'gun show loophole' is a GOOD thing, not a bad one, and I wouldn't favor overturning it. I even DO think that it's OK for certain people (i.e. emotionally stable, careful people with good backgrounds) to own rocket launchers and tanks and stuff.

But give me a break! I'm somehow anti-second ammendment because I don't think that anybody should be able to walk into a store and buy anti-aircraft rockets? That's perposterous.



134 posted on 11/26/2005 9:08:35 PM PST by zbigreddogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson